The relationship and conduct until the eviction
- A relationship between the parties was conducted, which began in 2014, with the signing of the 2014 agreement, which is a lease agreement, according to which the tenant rented part of the property from the plaintiff (an area of 402 square meters and a yard of 300 square meters, as well as a gazebo, a storage room and a relative part of a garbage room) in order to establish and operate a luxury restaurant there.
- The 2014 agreement brought the parties to the conflict, in which each side believed that the other was violating the agreement and not promoting it. Therefore, the tenant filed the 2017 claim against the plaintiff and the plaintiff filed a counterclaim. As part of the lawsuit, an injunction was requested to prevent the plaintiff from thwarting the 2014 agreement or to realize the bank guarantee given to secure the 2014 agreement in the amount of approximately ILS 106,000. The Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court (the Honorable Judge Rachel Arkobi) wrote in its decision: "I have determined, not without much hesitation, that temporary relief should be granted prohibiting the respondent from cancelling the lease agreement and renting out the leased property to third parties, subject to the deposit of a cash guarantee or a bank guarantee in the amount of ILS 400,000 to secure any damage that may be caused to the respondent as a result of the relief granted. I further determined that there is no reason to order an injunction on the subject of the bank guarantee, and the temporary relief in this matter is canceled" (paragraph 72 of the decision of March 28, 2018).
- After the aforementioned decision, the parties conducted negotiations. At the same time, in June 2018, the Local Planning and Building Committee granted an occupancy permit (see the appendix to the 2018 agreement on page 85 of the company's first affidavit and clause 2.4 of the 2018 agreement).
- On July 10, 2018, the 2018 agreement was signed, which also brought the 2017 claim to an end and canceled the 2014 agreement.
- The 2018 agreement expanded the 2014 agreement in the sense that in addition to renting the original area according to the 2014 agreement, which was intended for the restaurant, the tenant rented an additional area for the purpose of a "boutique hotel" with an area of 447 square meters, as well as an area of 26 square meters uncovered on the first floor above the ground floor, as well as a gallery of about 196 square meters and a service storage area of about 23 square meters on the second floor.
- The clauses of the agreement and the mutual obligations indicate that the building was handed over to the tenant in its AS condition when it has a certificate of occupancy and "when all the existing systems in it are in good working order and are empty of any person and object" (clause 2.4 of the 2018 agreement). The property was handed over as a new and renovated envelope according to strict conservation guidelines. The tenant undertook to act to obtain permits and licenses suitable for the purposes of the lease, while the use of the building for the hotel is subject to obtaining a permit for excessive use.
In clause 11 of the 2018 agreement, the tenant undertook to renovate the leased property in order to use it for rental purposes. In addition, section 11.3 discusses the issue of the opening to the shelf between the upper and lower floors of the building. What was called "The Shaft". The tenant submitted a plan with the marking of the requested place to a "shaft" that was approved by the constructor and it was determined that the plaintiff would bear the cost of the work when the execution would be by the tenant's contractor.